rjmccall added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/lib/AST/Stmt.cpp:370-371 setStmts(Stmts); + if (hasStoredFPFeatures()) + setStoredFPFeatures(FPFeatures); } ---------------- aaron.ballman wrote: > rjmccall wrote: > > aaron.ballman wrote: > > > There's a part of me that wonders if it's a slightly more clear design to > > > have `setStoredFPFeatures()` set `CompoundStmtBits.HasFPFeatures` to true > > > as needed rather than requiring the caller to do this two-step > > > initialization process. WDYT? > > `setStoredFPFeatures` is only otherwise used in deserialization, and the > > node has to be allocated properly to support it. I think this is the right > > approach. > My concern was more with new calls added later -- it seems reasonable that > someone would think they could call `setStoredFPFeatures()` and have them > stored rather than asserting the object already claims to have stored > features. > > That said, I don't feel strongly, so we can always adjust it in the future as > new callers are added. Well, it's private, and there's a comment on it saying that it's only used by serialization. Because the trailing storage for the features doesn't actually exist unless the node was allocated specially, I think it's probably more important to allow for the safety check that the node was allocated that way than to worry about transient semi-initialized states during deserialization, which already has a lot of potential problems like this. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D123952/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D123952 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
